[On 3 August, the fatality figure for July 2007 at Iraq Coalition Casualty Count was revised down to 80. Michael White at ICCC says that a fatality announcement from 19 July was never confirmed and was removed from the database.]
On 31 July, before the month had even ended, Stephen Farrell of the New York Times wrote a story titled “U.S. Death Toll in Iraq in July Expected to Be Lowest in 07”. Based on the figure reported by Iraq Coalition Casualty Count at the time (74), that was certainly true. Also true at the time was the claim in the headline of an Associated Press story by Kim Gamel in The Washington Post that read “U.S. Toll in Iraq Lowest in 8 Months”.
By the end of 2 August, the total US military deaths reported by Iraq Coalition Casualty Count was 81, the same as the figure for February and March of this year. The number of deaths was still the lowest for any month of the year, but three of the seven months this year could claim the same. The eight month streak had shortened to four. And there is still a possibility that more July deaths may be recorded.
Both stories couched their claims. The AP story mentioned in its fourth paragraph that July 2007 was the deadliest July since the beginning of the war (54 had died in July 2004 and 2005). The Times article admitted several paragraphs in that “Some casualties in late July may be reported after the beginning of August, so the count is not yet definitive for the month.” Both quoted military officials — who should well know when the reports for a month could be considered final — noting the early numbers as heartening or a “positive sign”.
For the last three years now, July has been a month when — by chance or due to some operational reason — fatalities among US troops went down in Iraq compared to June of the same year. The drop in 2005 and 2006 was around 30%. If the July 2007 figure had held at 73 or 74, the drop from 101 in June would have been about 30%. That is when the two stories were released, despite the expressed knowledge by the reporters that the figure would almost certainly continue to rise for a couple of days. As it currently stands, the trend in the absolute number of deaths from the previous Julys doesn’t look good (2005: 54, 2006: 43, 2007: 81). Even worse is the trend of the drop from June to July (2005: -31%, 2006: -30%, 2007: -20%).
Despite their caveats, and the almost certain knowledge that their statements would be blown out of the water by figures to be released in a couple of days, this is how “responsible” journalists and editors lead the Times story:
BAGHDAD, July 31 — The death of a marine in western Iraq brought the American military death toll to 74 so far in July, on course to be the lowest monthly figure this year.
Was it? Because by the end of the workday in the US on 2 August, that statement and the headline above it were invalid.
This is the AP lead:
BAGHDAD — American military deaths for July rose to 73 on Tuesday with the report of a Marine killed in combat, but the toll was still the lowest in eight months as the U.S. said it was gaining control of former militant strongholds.
Which part of that statement is backed up by facts, do you think?
See also “Spinning the Dance of Death”.